Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 146 posts

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#121

Post by Retric »

gamblor956 wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There would need to be (1) an existing valid contract, Your (1) is false. You can damage a business relationship that doesn’t involve a signed contract. “Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor intentionally acts to prevent someone from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships with others.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

That's not a tort in American law. In this country contractual arrangement is required for tortious interference.

There was a contract between the auction house and the artist.

However that’s not strictly required: “Wrongful interference in a business relationship occurs when there is no contract. The defendant attempts to disrupt the relationship, causing economic harm. If the defendant defames the business owner’s product, resulting in loss of business, that is tortious interference in the business.”

https://www.findlaw.com/smallbusiness/liability-and-insuranc...

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#122

Post by gnabgib »

aspenmayer wrote: post #119
tptacek wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both of you are hashing something out that 'dang has already called out as off-topic across the thread.

Dang has told me more than once to let the mods do the moderating and to not hash it out amongst ourselves, as it steps on their toes and makes any enforcement by mods seem selective. Email and/or flag, and move along. I don’t work here, and neither do you, so let’s both agree to disagree on it being on-topic or not, as it’s not my place to speak for dang or the other mods, and it’s not yours either, for that matter.

[flagged]

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#123

Post by aspenmayer »

gnabgib wrote: post #122
aspenmayer wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dang has told me more than once to let the mods do the moderating and to not hash it out amongst ourselves, as it steps on their toes and makes any enforcement by mods seem selective. Email and/or flag, and move along. I don’t work here, and neither do you, so let’s both agree to disagree on it being on-topic or not, as it’s not my place to speak for dang or the other mods, and it’s not yours either, for that matter.

[flagged]

They should say so in their bio, and they should not speak for each other, and so on. It’s messy and unprofessional as it is, and big if true.

I don’t appreciate you jumping into the thread to dogpile either, but you do you.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#124

Post by meowface »

tptacek wrote: post #63
meowface wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly something is missing. Either he's lying, or Medicare won't fully cover some if his expected costs.

What do you mean? He's not sick, so far as this reporting is concerned; he's just saving against possible expenses.

I should've been more clear, sorry. By "expected costs", I mean speculative costs. Medicare probably is not sufficient if this particular person has such worries, no? Either he's irrationally paranoid or Medicare isn't as comprehensive as it should be.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#125

Post by thesmtsolver »

aspenmayer wrote: post #115
thesmtsolver wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates. Yes, and you can make a straightforward logical deduction from survival rates to delaying diagnosis which I left out, but detail it below: 1. From Data: Assume equal or worse cancer rates in the US and similar levels of cures across US and Europe (cancer rates are indeed worse in the US and…

Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines. > I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that. We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individu…

> Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines.

No. I really wish you would have bravely responded to the points rather than accuse me. Do the guidelines encourage or discourage good faith arguments?

That "numbered list" is called a proof or argument. My PhD was in mathematical logic (see my user name).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof

https://people.cs.pitt.edu/~milos/courses/cs441/lectures/Cla...

An AI accusation on top of misrepresenting that the original point OP made was about population-level patterns.

> This is one reason foreign doctors come to the US to study and train. Modern countries with Universal Health Care treat at stage 1 and 2 with 3 and 4 being rare ... except for the USA. Need to study advance cancer and aggressive, this USA is a great place.

I don't think it is productive for us to continue this conversation. It is really sad that minor formatting and rudimentary logic is all it takes for some people to suspect AI usage.

Response to:

> If you reread what I wrote, I didn’t say you were AI or not using it, merely bringing to your and the other readers’ attention that your formatting wasn’t the norm for many folks who post on this site, whereas it is the norm for many AI-generated outputs.

Ah, the classic. "Did you beat your wife? I didn't make accusations! I am just questions!"

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#126

Post by aspenmayer »

thesmtsolver wrote: post #125
aspenmayer wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines. > I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that. We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individu…

> Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines. No. I really wish you would have bravely responded to the points rather than accuse me. Do the guidelines encourage or discourage good faith arguments? That "numbered list" is called a proof or argument. My PhD was…

> An AI accusation on top of not grasping that the point OP made was about population-level patterns.

If you reread what I wrote, I didn’t say you were AI or using it, or not, but merely bringing to your and the other readers’ attention that your formatting wasn’t the norm for many folks who post on this site, whereas it is the norm for many AI-generated outputs.

That the conclusion you draw is one of being a victim of a false accusation, when none was laid at your feet? “A guilty conscience needs no accuser,” so they say.

> I don't think it is productive for me to continue this conversation.

On this point, I am full agreement. Apologies if I have upset you or wasted your time. I found your points well-reasoned but a diversion to what was supposedly already beside the point, so I will only say that two wrongs don’t make a right, but three lefts do. All roads lead to Rome, and we got there together in the end.

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#127

Post by [deleted] »

gamblor956 wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There would need to be (1) an existing valid contract, Your (1) is false. You can damage a business relationship that doesn’t involve a signed contract. “Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor intentionally acts to prevent someone from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships with others.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

That's not a tort in American law. In this country contractual arrangement is required for tortious interference.

[deleted]

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#128

Post by [deleted] »

gamblor956 wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There would need to be (1) an existing valid contract, Your (1) is false. You can damage a business relationship that doesn’t involve a signed contract. “Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor intentionally acts to prevent someone from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships with others.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

That's not a tort in American law. In this country contractual arrangement is required for tortious interference.

[deleted]

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#129

Post by [deleted] »

gamblor956 wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There would need to be (1) an existing valid contract, Your (1) is false. You can damage a business relationship that doesn’t involve a signed contract. “Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor intentionally acts to prevent someone from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships with others.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

That's not a tort in American law. In this country contractual arrangement is required for tortious interference.

[deleted]

Re: Solution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault

#130

Post by tptacek »

aspenmayer wrote: post #123
gnabgib wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They should say so in their bio, and they should not speak for each other, and so on. It’s messy and unprofessional as it is, and big if true. I don’t appreciate you jumping into the thread to dogpile either, but you do you.

I'm not a moderator.
Post reply on HN